This study determined the rate and indication for revision between cemented, uncemented, hybrid and resurfacing groups from NJR (6th edition) data. Data validity was determined by interrogating for episodes of misclassification. We identified 6,034 (2.7%) misclassified episodes, containing 97 (4.3%) revisions. Kaplan-Meier revision rates at 3 years were 0.9% cemented, 1.9% for uncemented, 1.2% for hybrids and 3.0% for resurfacings (significant difference across all groups, p<0.001, with identical pattern in patients <55 years). Regression analysis indicated both prosthesis group and age significantly influenced failure (p<0.001). Revision for pain, aseptic loosening, and malalignment were highest in uncemented and resurfacing arthroplasty. Revision for dislocation was highest in uncemented hips (significant difference between groups, p<0.001). Feedback to the NJR on data misclassification has been made for future analysis.
DixonT., ShawM., EbrahimS., DieppeP.Trends in hip and knee joint replacement: socioeconomic inequalities and projections of need.Ann Rheum Dis2002; 63: 825–30.
2.
KurtzS., OngK., LauE., MowatF., HalpernM.Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030.J Bone Joint Surg Am2007; 89: 780–5.
3.
HoranF.The National Joint Registry for England and Wales.J Bone Joint Surg Br2003; 85: 618.
4.
EmsleyD., NewellC., PickfordM., RoyallM., SwansonM.National Joint Registry for England and Wales 6th Annual Report: 2009. Available at: www.njrcentre.org.uk. Accessed July 14, 2011.
5.
National Joint Registry. Available at: www.njrcentre.org.uk. Accessed July 14, 2011.
6.
National Joint Registry.National Joint Registry for England and Wales 4th Annual Report; 2006. Available at: www.njrcentre.org.uk. Accessed July 14, 2011.
7.
National Joint Registry.National Joint Registry for England and Wales 7th Annual Report; 2009. Available at: www.njr-centre.org.uk. Accessed July 14, 2011.
8.
HailerN.P., GarellickG., KärrholmJ.Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register.Acta Orthop2010; 81: 34–41.
9.
GravesS.E., DavidsonD., IngersonL.The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.Med J Aus2004; 180(5 suppl): S31–4.
10.
HailerN.P., GarellickG., KärrholmJ.Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register.Acta Orthop2010; 81: 34–41.
11.
SchreursB.W., GardeniersJ.W.Total hip arthroplasty for primary osteoarthroses in younger patients in the Finnish arthroplasty register.Acta Orthop2005; 76: 604–5; author reply 605–7.
12.
HobbsT.New Zealand Orthopaedic Association: The New Zealand Joint Registry Ninth Year Report, January 1999 to December 2007.
13.
HooperG.J., RothwellA.G., StringerM., FramptonC.Revision following cemented and uncemented primary total hip replacement: a seven-year analysis from the New Zealand Joint Registry.J Bone Joint Surg Br2009; 91: 451–8.
14.
PuolakkaT.J., PajamäkiK.J., HalonenP.J., PulkkinenP.O., PaavolainenP., NevalainenJ.K.The Finnish Arthroplasty Register: report of the hip register.Acta Orthop Scand2001; 72: 433–41.
15.
KarrholmJ., GarellickG., HerbertsP.Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Annual Report 2008. Available at: www.jru.orthop.gu.se. Accessed December 14, 2010.
16.
WillertH.G., BuchhornG.H.Osseointegration of cemented and noncemented implants in artificial hip replacement: long-term findings in man.J Long Term Eff Med Implants1999; 9: 113–30.
BrodnerW., GrüblA., JankovskyR., MeisingerV., LehrS., Gottsauner-WolfF.Cup inclination and serum concentration of cobalt and chromium after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.J Arthroplasty2004; 19(Suppl 3): 66–70.
19.
VendittoliP-A, MottardS., RoyA.G., DupontC., LavigneM.Chromium and cobalt ion release following the Durom high carbon content, forged metal-on-metal surface replacement of the hip.J Bone Joint Surg Br2007; 89: 441–8.
20.
LangtonD.J., JamesonS.S., JoyceT.J., HallabN.J., NatuS., NargolA.V.Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: A consequence of excess wear.J Bone Joint Surg Br2010; 92: 38–46.
21.
HartA.J., SabahS., HenckelJ.The painful metal-on-metal hip resurfacing.J Bone Joint Surg Br2009; 91: 738–44.
22.
MalviyaA., HollandJ.P.Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: 10-year Newcastle experience.Acta Orthop Belg2009; 75: 477–83.
23.
BrownT.E., LarsonB., ShenF., MoskalJ.T.Thigh pain after cementless total hip arthroplasty: evaluation and management.J Am Acad Orthop Surg2002; 10: 385–92.
24.
EnghC.A.Jr., CulpepperWJ, EnghC.A.Long-term results of use of the anatomic medullary locking prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg Am1997; 79: 177–84.
25.
Fernandez-FernandezR., García-EliasE., Gil-GarayE.Peroperative fractures in uncemented total hip arthroplasty: results with a single design of stem implant.Int Orthop2008; 32: 307–13.
26.
ConroyJ.L., WhitehouseS.L., GravesS.E., PrattN.L., RyanP., CrawfordR.W.Risk factors for revision for early dislocation in total hip arthroplasty.J Arthroplasty2008; 23: 867–72.
